History
offers many examples of societies which have sought to increase security
by sacrificing freedom. America itself provides many pertinent instances.
However, our founding fathers have not left us without wisdom on this
issue. Ben Franklin has famously stated, "People willing to trade
freedom for temporary security deserve neither and will lose both."
REAL ID undoubtedly exemplifies a scenario in which a difficult tension
exists between freedom and security. By commandeering every state's
driver's license issuing process, REAL ID threatens the results warned
by Franklin - loss of both freedom and security. It has become the biometric
enrollment phase of a plan to implement a terribly invasive tracking
system, largely without public knowledge or approval. REAL ID is merely
the current face of a far larger, international government and private
economic effort to collect, store, and distribute the sensitive biometric
data of citizens to use for the twin purposes of government tracking
and economic control. At issue are much more than standardized or non-duplicative
driver's licenses. This effort extends worldwide, threatening every
person alive today. Although very legitimate security concerns exist
in this age of terrorism, this Act extends far beyond terrorism prevention
or protection of the innocent. Keeping that broad picture in mind, let
us move to some background behind the face of REAL ID implementation
in America.

The
REAL ID Act passed Congress in 2005 buried in a "must-pass"
war funding and tsunami relief bill. The little debate in the House
and total absence of debate in the Senate ensured that many Congressmen
did not realize the full implications of REAL ID. Importantly, the desire
by government and economic interests to implement a national tracking
and ID system did not start with the REAL ID Act in 2005. Under the
guise of security, it has been attempted numerous times in the past,
even during Ronald Reagan's administration. When former Attorney General
William French Smith proposed to implement what he called a "perfectly
harmless" national ID system as well as when a second cabinet member
proposed to "tattoo a number on each American's forearm,"
Ronald Reagan responded, "My God, that's the mark of the beast,"
signaling an abrupt end to the national ID debate during the Reagan
years.

The
significant opposition to a national ID system in the past extends to
the REAL ID issue today. This conviction has united both Democrats and
Republicans as well as such normally opposed groups as the ACLU and
the ACLJ. Whether the concern is privacy, religious rights, states'
rights, or cost of implementation, REAL ID has galvanized broad and
deep resistance, currently including an estimated six hundred groups.
Today, over twenty legislatures have passed resolutions or legislation
variously opposing implementation of the REAL ID Act. Eleven of those
legislatures have gone further by passing laws specifically prohibiting
compliance with REAL ID.

What
does REAL ID do? REAL ID attempts to mandate a standardized process
and format for all state drivers' licenses to achieve increased security.
Most importantly in this standardized process, REAL ID mandates a certain
picture quality. A footnote issued by the Department of Homeland Security
establishes this quality as compliant with the ICAO Document 9303 biometric
format. The global body setting this format, the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO), is a specialized agency created under
the United Nations. Biometric data can be produced from a simple digital
photograph of this quality by running the picture of a person's face
through a software program which measures and analyzes the unique, personally
identifiable characteristics of that face. The process results in a
unique numeric code which identifies a person according to facial measurements.
You read that correctly. A unique number or "code" is developed
from an algorithmic formula which converts a digital biometric sample
to biometric "face print" data. Under REAL ID biometric facial
recognition technology, you become a number literally worn on your face
- a number which is read by computer, tracked by surveillance camera,
and distributed worldwide. Clearly, this international standard provides
global compatibility of American citizens' biometric data collected
through REAL ID.

Having
this background, we should observe that many Americans still do not
know why the provisions of the REAL ID Act must be rejected and aggressively
opposed because they do not understand the full implications of REAL
ID. Many wrongly assume that the legitimate need for security trumps
all other considerations. However, REAL ID is not primarily about a
secure driver's license or terrorism prevention. The full and dangerous
implications of REAL ID may be fleshed out through a discussion of why
each American must vigorously oppose this Act's most basic tenets. It
poses dangers in the following three areas:

REAL
ID violates freedom of religion for some citizens by forcing inclusion
into a system which requires a picture - and more - just to access public
services. The Amish and some Mennonites provide examples of religious
groups who view the mere taking of photographs as idolatry. REAL ID
conditions their freedoms, such as entering a federal building, upon
a provision which violates their religious beliefs. Because this "government"
identification system limits travel and access to certain public places,
and could even become a debit card, other more mainline religious groups
view REAL ID as the advent of the "mark of the beast."

Particularly
because this technology assigns a unique number to represent each person's
biometric face print, these concerns are hardly unfounded.

A
Powerpoint presentation from L-1 Identity Solutions, the major biometrics
company in the U.S. today, bolsters this claim. A slide in that presentation
includes a graph which charts future likely applications for biometrics.
Phase 1 of this "blueprint" for biometric implementation utilizes
the authority of Federal agencies to impose such requirements as REAL
ID. Phase 2 utilizes bureaucratic leveraging on regulated industries
to implement biometrics. Phase 3 anticipates mass implementation on
the citizens at large for such everyday activities as buying and selling.
As an example, under Phase 2 DHS is attempting to force airlines to
pick up the costs of collecting biometrics from foreigners at airports.
In Texas under Phase 3, a company is experimenting with using the driver's
license as a debit card. Whether one is personally alarmed at some or
all of these concerns, REAL ID would prohibit the free exercise of religion
for many people.

Amendment
IV – Freedom of Privacy

REAL
ID also violatess the Fourth Amendment's guarantee of freedom of privacy.
First, by mandating the collection, storage, and dissemination of personally
identifiable data without any informed consent, REAL ID tramples on
this right. In reality, this practice constitutes government-sanctioned
identity theft and seriously breaches the "security of person"
guaranteed to every U.S. citizen. No sufficiently compelling need exists
to warrant government mass collection and storage of such sensitive
information about its citizens. Concern heightens even further when
private corporations control the databases being set up to house this
information. As an example, L-1 Identity Solutions houses a database
of U.S. driver's license information. This company, which has consolidated
a virtual monopoly on the driver's license issuing market in the U.S.,
will handle all private information collected during the license issuing
process.

Secondly,
REAL ID threatens freedom of privacy because this warehoused data cannot
be confidently secured. Even the Department of Homeland Security's own
Privacy Impact Assessment fails to guarantee that the database linking
and networking that will result from REAL ID will be secure. Many privacy
experts agree that REAL ID will actually increase identity theft! In
reality, the database and access to it will create an electronic superhighway
for potential mass identity theft.

Thirdly,
REAL ID violates the Fourth Amendment in that the process of collecting
personal biometric data without consent violates the very laws that
exist to protect against such measures. This is probably one of the
most significant Constitutional issues. Current US law allows the collection
of biometric information only in the case of criminal activity. However,
REAL ID institutionalizes the capture of facial recognition biometrics
for every driver, regardless of criminality.

Fourthly,
REAL ID ripens the climate for aggressive efforts to control the masses
via information and leading-edge technology, regardless of crucial privacy
considerations. Data collection and surveillance is simultaneously occurring
across several diverse fronts, each one a potential privacy danger painting
the broader picture of where REAL ID will take us as a country. For
instance:

1-
In Rhode Island, a school district is allowing a company to place radio
frequency tracking (RFID) chips in students' book bags.

2-
Nationwide, Great Britain has installed an estimated 4.2 million surveillance
cameras utilizing facial recognition technology to keep tabs on all
citizens. These cameras, of which there is 1 for every 14 citizens,
can observe a person up to 300 times in a normal day in the city of
London.

3-
China is aggressively pursuing country-wide surveillance of its citizens
using facial recognition technology purchased from a contractor supplied
by the previously mentioned L-1 Identity Solutions.

4-
According to a June 28, 2008 New York Times article, US and European
officials are nearly agreed upon a "binding international agreement"
which would allow "European governments and companies to transfer
personal information to the United States, and vice versa." Under
the cloak of terrorism prevention, European governments could request
"private information - like credit card transactions, travel histories,
and Internet browsing habits" about American citizens.

5-
Homeland Security Presidential Directive 24 issued by the President
on June 5, 2008, "establishes a framework to ensure that Federal
executive departments and agencies use mutually compatible methods and
procedures in the collection, storage, use, analysis, and sharing of
biometric and associated biographic and contextual information of individuals."
This step shows the President's extensive authority and disregard for
privacy in streamlining the biometric sharing process.

6-
The FBI is currently building a billion-dollar database to house an
enormous amount of biometric data. While officially aimed at housing
criminal and terrorist data, this database already retains finger prints,
iris scans and other individual biometrics that the government collects
on ordinary citizens. Who knows the extent of the private information
that will be stored in this massive database? REAL ID-collected "face
prints" are just one more piece of the data collection and tracking
system.

These
examples only serve to underscore the aggressive global government efforts
to track and control citizens. In every case, REAL ID violates the freedoms
guaranteed by the Fourth Amendment.

Amendment
X – States' Riights

REAL
ID violates the Tenth Amendment in that the federal government is attempting
to force the states to collect private data on their citizens, only
to allow that data to be shipped out-of-state and shared worldwide.
This action forces the states to work against the very interests of
the citizens they are to protect. When states accede to this pressure
under REAL ID, they allow the transfer of state authority to the federal
government. The separation of powers built into our Constitution then
crumbles as the federal government makes the rules, interprets the rules,
and enforces the rules regarding all state drivers' licenses.

II-
In addition to the three ways REAL ID would violate the Constitution,
compliance with the REAL ID Act would undermine our national and state
sovereignty. While REAL ID reads like a manual for a national ID card,
the Department of Homeland Security's own rules for REAL ID reveal that
it implements an international ID system based on biometric identification.
Complying with the requirements under REAL ID would violate U.S. national
and state sovereignty by forcing states to adopt international biometric
facial image standards and to document standards set by international
organizations.

As
mentioned previously, the ICAO, affiliated with the UN, sets the standards
for facial image captures (photos). Besides tracking the movements of
international travelers, the ICAO also has assumed the responsibility
of creating a common international passport system that stores individual
personal and biometric information on a RFID chip built into the passport.
The American Association of Motor Vehicle Administrators (AAMVA), which
recognizes ICAO standards, "enables" this scheme. This international
body and private organization sets nearly all the standards for REAL
ID document scanning, storage, data encryption, barcode and layout design
to comply with their 2005 international driver's license system. Under
REAL ID, AAMVA is the hub and backbone of the database system being
set up to share information between states. From a broad perspective,
the system created by REAL ID destroys national sovereignty and constitutional
authority by removing control of government from the people and establishing
government control over the people.

Furthering
AAMVA's control strategy here in North America, implementation of REAL
ID is "de facto" enrollment of each state into AAMVA's Driver's
License Agreement (DLA). AAMVA has pushed the DLA, which meets REAL
ID specifications, for nearly ten years. The implementation of this
DLA is crucially important to the global effort because it mandates
the sharing of all U.S. drivers' license information with Mexico and
Canada. This egregious step places U.S. citizen's data at the mercy
of Canadian and Mexican privacy controls, further exacerbating the identity
theft problem, and violating Constitutional law and national sovereignty
by essentially having states form a treaty with a foreign nation.

REAL
ID also violates national sovereignty because any international system
includes and requires agreements and obligations that would weaken any
sovereign standing. In fact, a Government Computer News report notes
the following from Robert Mocny, acting program manager for the U.S.
Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology program. His quote
comes from comments about a federal plan to extend biometric data sharing
to Asian and European governments and corporations, so as to create
a Global Security Envelope of identity management.

"My
question is, how is it ethical not to share?" Mocny asked. "It
makes no sense for us to develop separate systems . . . information
sharing is appropriate around the world." Government Computer News
further notes that he is sketching a plan for sharing biometric data
that would permanently link an individual with data that governments
and corporations hold. Since both governments and corporations have
been infiltrated by extremists and terrorists and since certain governments
of today may be our enemies tomorrow, I hardly think that worldwide
sharing of our citizen's data is a good idea!

Enhanced
Driver's Licenses (or EDL's) provide a further example of the undermining
of national and state sovereignty. Citizens that purchase these nearly
REAL ID-compliant licenses, which contain biographic and biometric information
on an RFID chip, can use them as a passport to enter either Mexico or
Canada. This advancement establishes the international ID designation
of REAL ID. The Canadian province British Columbia has also issued a
new EDL which, according to their website is also, "an acceptable
document for entry from Canada into the United States by land and water."

Advertisement

REAL
ID violates state sovereignty because the issue in contention is "national
identity management", with the federal government manipulating
the tool of state driver's licenses. Consider the following statements
about REAL ID from Electronic Data Systems, the very company likely
to maintain AAMVA's driver's license database: "The Real ID Act,
then, is about more than a driver's license. It puts in place a set
of standards for Identity Management (IdM) that can be leveraged across
an entire government organization to create an integrated citizen identity
security program." The international biometric standards mandated
in DHS's final rules, paint the broader picture of an international
ID card for government surveillance and tracking.

III-
REAL ID would endanger Constitutional rights and both national and state
sovereignty. Finally, let us consider that compliance with the REAL
ID Act would compromise the safety of our people. Unlike what some government
officials might say, 9/11 and the prevention of terrorism are not the
real reasons for REAL ID. In fact, this technology was being pushed
well before 9/11. Although REAL ID and biometrics are promoted as the
"cure-all" to terrorism and identity theft problems, many
highly dispute this claim. In response to the post-9/11 claims of biometrics
companies that their technology could have prevented 9/11, Jim Wayman,
the former head of the US Biometrics Center countered, "No, the
government didn't have this stuff in place, precisely because it had
been working on it and knew its limitations and didn't find any value
for the costs involved." He further noted, "It's going to
be hard to know how these technologies can be applied to increase national
security. We're not just going to turn these machines on and start catching
terrorists." REAL ID will not assure greater safety since terrorists
will either avoid or duplicate a REAL ID compliant drivers' license,
although a correctly operating biometric system would certainly increase
the difficulty of faking or forging a license.

Despite
the government's assurances about the "certain" safety benefits
of REAL ID, no government or company can create a foolproof, perfectly
secure system. A person who breaks the law or who desires to wreak havoc
on American soil will find a loophole with which to avoid the requirements
of REAL ID. One needs only consider that driver's licenses on the black
market will continue to be readily available.

Further,
the safety of law abiding citizens will be compromised as their identities
are stolen, stored and made accessible to thieves around the globe.
Some people reject this idea because they hope that the government will
be able to protect their identity once it has all of a person's information.
The simple faith implicit in this idea is widely misplaced, however.
As proof, consider that in 2007, a Globe and Mail report noted, "A
security flaw in Passport Canada's website has allowed easy access to
the personal information - including social insurance numbers, dates
of birth and driver's licence numbers - of people applying for new passports."
A breach of security in Great Britain last December resulted in the
loss of approximately 25 million individual records. In my state of
Pennsylvania, a security breach which occurred two years ago at a Driver's
License Center resulted in over 11,000 records being compromised. Such
security breaches highlight significant personal dangers to law abiding
citizens and prove that the only secure data is uncollected data.

Finally,
REAL ID does not assure safety because biometric technology itself does
not work predictably. At this point in time, the technology we are discussing
does not work well; hence REAL ID and facial recognition biometrics
can not ensure safety. As a result, no one has yet been successfully
prosecuted via facial biometrics. The opportunity for false identification
and therefore being, "guilty before proven innocent" is great.
For example, the Tampa, Florida police force scrapped a facial recognition
system in 2003 because, according to a spokesman, "We never identified,
were alerted to, or caught any criminal. It didn't work." While
on its face, the concept of REAL ID seems like it would increase security,
it does not. A Privacy International Study conducted in 2004 found "Of
the 25 countries that have been most adversely affected by terrorism
since 1986, eighty percent have national identity cards, one third of
which incorporate biometrics. This research was unable to uncover any
instance where the presence of an identity card system in those countries
was seen as a significant deterrent to terrorist activity." The
simple truth is that REAL ID cannot stop crime.

In
summary, we have seen that REAL ID threatens Constitutional rights,
national and state sovereignty, and the safety of our people. The enrollment
of American citizens into an international biometric system of identification
and tracking constitutes the heart of the REAL ID issue. A secure driver's
license is not the ultimate goal or certainly the ultimate result of
the REAL ID Act. And it is unfortunately clear that the ultimate purpose
is government tracking and economic control through enhanced knowledge
and surveillance through biometric identification and tracking.

This
being established, it is clear that this aggressive effort of the federal
government, working hand-in-hand with private commercial interests,
must be opposed on every level. While Congress must move to quickly
repeal the passage of the REAL ID Act, the states provide an ideal position
from which to fight this encroachment by the federal government. The
responsibility for the security and privacy of our own generation and
the generations to come, however, rests upon our shoulders.

The
next action to be taken involves the following three steps.

First,
Congress must immediately repeal the REAL ID Act and resist any effort
to pass anything remotely similar. Secondly, individual states which
have not passed legislation preventing implementation of any provision
of REAL ID, particularly the biometric portion, must do so without delay.
As has been stressed throughout this article, biometrics is the core
provision of REAL ID; consequently, the states must move to protect
their citizens' biometric data immediately. This step is critical because
the vast majority of statutory law did not envision the breadth of individually
identifiable data that could be gleaned by rapidly advancing technology.
Further, because L-1 Identity Solutions holds a virtual monopoly as
contractor for state DMVs, they could use their position to coerce the
states into implementing all of DHS's wishes. This scenario further
endangers state's rights.

Therefore,
it is not enough for states to simply stop collecting biometric data.
They must purge and "dumb-down" databases to preclude any
government knowledge or use of private citizen's biometrics. Additionally,
private third-party inspections should be ordered to ensure that all
measures have been fully implemented. Fundamentally, the states must
demand control – they must inform the contractor what to ddo,
not vice versa. Thirdly, citizens must play a role in resisting illegitimate
actions of the federal government. They must be encouraged in their
capacity as law-abiding citizens to whom Constitutional guarantees were
acknowledged, to resist implementation of any effort that would compromise
their individual, God-given rights.

Subscribe to the NewsWithViews Daily News Alerts!

Enter Your E-Mail Address:

The
American people remain the strongest defenders of freedom in the world.
Many in our past have died for the liberties we enjoy today. Most of
us are still willing to fight and die today for our freedom and the
freedom of our children tomorrow. May we each do our part to ensure
the greatest nation on earth remains "the land of the free and
the home of the brave!"

"Liberty
has never come from the government; it has always come from the subjects
of it. The history of liberty is a history of limitation of governmental
power, not the increase of it." -Woodrow Wilson

Sam
Rohrer is a Representative for the state of Pennsylvania and a member
of the American Policy Center Advisory Board.

Therefore, it is
not enough for states to simply stop collecting biometric data. They must
purge and "dumb-down" databases to preclude any government knowledge
or use of private citizen's biometrics. Additionally, private third-party
inspections should be ordered to ensure that all measures have been fully
implemented.